If everyone simultaneously imposes the same cooldown period for picking up a new dependency, that's as good as nothing at all. The malicious change just sits there for 20 days (or whatever) with nobody looking at it or running it. Then it hits everywhere at once.

However, a randomized cooldown may be a good idea. To borrow a pandemic term, it flattens the curve.

These would be fun for voice control in a video game.

Which would be called Castle Woofenstein.

> Speaking and discussing with other humans [who aren't incessantly blathering about AI] is obviously the most effective way to mitigate these problems.

Slightly FTFY.

Attacking the Pope did wonders for Sinead O'Connor, so what the hey ...

Yes, that is a thing.

Also fabricating integrated circuits on a diamond substrate.

That was a design feature of democracy all along, not a bug.

This is not the reality in every democracy.

I live in Switzerland, which has a highly functional democracy.

Basically they just need one more option:

> You'll never get me to use the app so stop trying.

I mean for the sake of the completeness of their how-to-get-people-to-use-app research, not just the benefit of the user who doesn't want the app.

You will not convert 100% of people to the app, unless you shut down the website, or make it so unusable on mobile that it might as well be shut down.

If they shut down the website and the decent third party apps, I'd actually stop browsing Reddit.

That sounds like a net positive, to be honest.

Running the code is reading. The machine reads the code and performs it.

I never called it a scam.

I think it's commendable for a huge corporation building lots of data centers to (partially) offset that impact. Amazon, Oracle and others aren't. It's unhealthy for a single company to be most of the market.

Can you point to a factual source for claiming it's a scam? If India and China aren't signatory to climate treaties, should there be no collective action?

Carbon credits are a scam. We quite simply don't have the technology to remove carbon from the atmosphere. The technology we do have is so incredibly inefficient and energy intensive that you end up burning more carbon generating the power to remove the carbon you're paid for.

If this were a feasible route, everyone would be pouring billions into the venture and they'd have more than one customer.

Carbon credits are and have always been pure grift and nothing more.

We do have that tech

It is called "trees"

i.e. they realized benefits to the environment out weigh the ability to make money

Consider two dictionaries, one in which the entries are alphabetized as usual and one in which they're randomized. Both support random access: you can turn to any page, and read any entry. Therefore both are "accessible". Only one actually supports useful, quick word lookup.